Cold reading the Korean culture borders going appeals to order. For when say
December seventeenth and began
a pledge of allegiance. To the fire.
Loving. Nation Under God is it will be possible.
To dispense with the explanation to Jews who write
a book well please. Mr Price here. Mr Barr told Mr Martin
your server Tim and Mr Running are here at this point we'll speak over
it really. Looked directly reflect that he did the
sparkles absent. We have. No one to swear in.
For we'll go to your fields which there is none and that means we can drop down to
resolution for adoption do you have
a piece of new business that come before. We have
a new item my gender will have new business but we can do new business but yeah
that was the change to the suggestion to the buy last. Night then we will
do
a new business for redress for adoption and definitely is true that we have should
be at your place
a newly edited version created in red. And then.
You go through the training just absolutely so the situation is is this we found
ourselves well we work hard to make this process as painless as possible for
everybody involved and I in conversations with peers learned of.
Different processes that are used in different townships.
The process that we use currently is one in which we have an appeal is heard
there's a public hearing there's
a strong vote that's held on the evening of the appeal and then
a month later we draft
a resolution to be journalist by the board thirty days later. That process is.
Is long in that. The original process starts when somebody.
Applies for his only certificate it gets denied they apply for
a variance they get put on
a docket this whole thing can take three months from start to finish and I found
a way that we can shrink that period of time to make it easier for folks that want
you know if you all are going to grant the variance then they can. Get there is
only significant get their voting permit and get whatever project is that they're
working on done quicker and that process looks like this we would have
a. An appeal it would be heard to be
a public hearing and then at the end instead of just taking
a straw vote you all would make
a motion and that motion would be. Would dispense with the action that would be
your formal action there would be no more resolutions but that would allow me to do
then is the day after the hearing I could issue there's only certificate and the
successful appellant could be on their way so the changes that are listed in red.
Are are changes to the bylaws that would allow this process to happen. A
second item that was changed was. Related to abstentions by board
members and the idea is that if you are going to participate in as
a board member if you all are going to participate in deliberations then at the end
of the day at the end of the case. It is rather incumbent upon you to make
a decision and and vote yes or no. The situation that we found ourselves in
sometimes is we have a member absent for example and there isn't
a replacement and now we have four board members it takes three affirmative votes
to grant
a variance if you have one person that is going to vote no and the second verse
person abstains it actually is
a defacto no vote because they're unable to grant there's
a case on this and the case says that you know members of
a busy A's are elected or placed in this case in positions of responsibility quote
for the purpose of expressing an opinion it is action and not an action that is
that is the duty which they assume with the at the office so it's still completely
appropriate for remember to abstain but they would just not participate in the
deliberations they abstain at the beginning and generally abstain because of
a conflict of interest and. I've been in. Tension. And so
I'm just trying to make sure that an applicant gets
a fair shake and is entitled to an up or down vote and little to that your opinion
as to whether or not it. Very And so those are those are the suggested changes and
I'd be happy answer any questions can you provide some clarity on the first part of
the motion which was
a motion shall be made pursuant to the instruction above within thirty days of the
final hearing of the people on the one. That's what you're saying in that if you
will you would have the ability to if you wanted to to not make them the motion
that day so if you wanted to you could have and you've had this ability before
labeling it you know you wouldn't table it you would just close the public hearing
and then not take action that evening and then that would allow you to take action
the next month if if circumstances you know dictated that that would be the right
thing to do or that was the will of the board so this is giving the board the
option Yes OK Now what on earth made for a motion and no one made
a motion that it just falls during the next month. That does
clear it up because I was looking pusing from nature and I thought we were still
have to wait
a few days for them to do something. You know you could you could still like the
way I envision it is standard hearing you know ninety nine percent of the cases are
going to be public hearing deliberation ocean but there may be an instance where it
makes sense to to wait thirty and you know another example of that would be since
we're not doing resolutions anymore and if we wanted to very finely crafted motion
then it would allow us to get the temperature of the board and then what I could do
then is go back to Larry Barbier and have him craft language or
a motion that would be defensible especially in cases where it's highly
controversial and and maybe it's
a denial and it's likely to be appealed and we want to make sure that the language
of the motion is very. Crafted very specifically acting so you could say you know
these are the deliberations this is how I feel and then you could and then we could
go back and get
a good language for the motion like
in the last paragraph this liberation
that. Yeah.
What every. Truck.
Then what you're saying the last paragraph is when we go in to prove our meeting
there that's finalizing that's at no longer can appeal the decision that has been
made if we make
a decision we could be of the appeal date would begin with the motion but.
It would in my conversations with Larry with Mr Barbee air. And this actually goes
to the point that Mr Martin raised in an e-mail to the board related to the date of
journalism and so the clock starts on the ability to appeal when the motion is
so. That's when but it would be formalized you would see the motion in writing in
the minutes and that would be the record moving forward if we had to look back and
say sort of looking at
a resolution we would look back and see the minutes. I've got
two comments one one procedural and one substantive on the procedural this is
directed both to Jeff and to the chair. Since joining the board I really have made
an effort to play nice I don't believe in God meetings so in the future when I do
send out e-mails that are substantive of nature and make up I think constructive
suggestions I would ask that the chair at least acknowledge the e-mail and that you
acknowledge even though you don't have to respond to it but just tell me that you
got it because I think the comp the email that you would just alluded to I sent out
over
a week ago and I heard from no one not any board member not the chair and I don't
think that's appropriate I think I should hear at least from the chair and from you
in terms of saying whether the email was right wrong or are subject to
interpretation but I would ask that be the case in the future and I will continue
to play nice but in order to do that that's the way I think I need to hear back
from you guys I think that if we're going to have
a conversation about the merits of something that is discussed in my group meeting
it needs to be in an open meeting absolute distinct Just tell me I got your email
and it's under you know taken to Barbieri but hearing nothing I frankly I don't
know if you get the emails or not though I think it's just I should get some
acknowledgment that's all I'm asking for not
a substantive I think it would be highly inappropriate to have
a substantive online discussion on just saying as I got your email point better
POINT we'll talk about it whatever that's all it does this sort of dialogue and
it's not talking about specific case fall in the sunshine law. Good question I
don't know I don't know the exact answer to that I just preferred not to have
substantive conversations through you now and I think that you're right there may
be some wiggle room there because this is less about her face and more about the
internal workings of the board right but. I just always err on the side of caution
and I agree with that too that's why as I wish some of our substantive discussions
about other issues have been at the meeting and that's why I resisted. The effort
to that the military want to be to meet with them on something which I thought was
that that should be met upon which was the whole issue of finding out about
violations I'm not trying to but we're over the whole past I just think that in the
future you don't have to say yes you don't have to say Good idea bad idea this time
you got the email and leave it at that that's all I just need to hear that you guys
get the stuff that's all I'm saying on the on the substantive issue. On the vote
not to upstage. In fact if you read that case which I assume you have it's not as
you just stated a an abstention this is
a defacto Yes under the common law in Ohio and that case confirms it so if
a member of the abstains and in Ohio is basically
a constructive Yes though there in fact there is absolutely nothing wrong or would
not change anything with an abstention and there are times when I think it is
important that
a member have the ability to abstain even when they participated in the discussions
obviously if there's
a conflict of interest they need to abstain from participating in the discussions
however. And I'll give you the example that immediately comes to mind and that's
the signage up on Culver and ave the high sign which I think is still there the
Iron Works silver been removed I did not in that situation there was actually no
reason why I couldn't participate so I did not abstain from the discussion on the
other hand I didn't feel comfortable voting violation of that particular
circumstance because in my opinion and it's only my opinion. That person was being
unfairly treated because they did the right thing by filing the appeal whereas
other notices
a violation of been issued other people of color an avenue and they just ignored us
this person in my opinion rightly or wrongly and I'm not looking for
a substantive discussion about that all again but rightly or wrongly I thought that
they were being disadvantaged However. They certainly were in violation of the
ordinance but consequently of vote of no by me would have indicated that I thought
they were were not in violation of vote of yes by me was not consistent with my
conscience Consequently I abstained and under Ohio law knowing full well that under
Ohio law had there been
a tie or had there been other people that for whatever reason you needed to count
my vote it would have been counted as a yes but at least as
a matter of principle as I stated in my email to you I had the opportunity to
abstain so. If need be you can check with Marbury about that if you haven't read
the case but that's what the cases I did talk with Mr Barbier and we discussed the
case and we discussed the putting in. Language into the bylaws that would
make an abstention
a de facto yes and is legal opinion was he didn't feel comfortable with that and I
do that because the courts might change their mind on that and that's it and I
think
a situation best left to the courts but the My point is there's no need to address
this issue that hasn't it has not in my two years on the on the board it has not
been an issue and it has only been one instance where there's been an abstention if
it had been an issue under our laws Mr Barberry would have told you it would have
been counted as
a yes so why why roll over Iraq that we don't need to roll over in my opinion our
opinions differ my opinion it is an issue and it could be an issue in the future
and I believe that if somebody is going to go through this process and they deserve
a yes or
a no vote and an extension is. When you need three votes to pass
an appeal and if there is someone absent as I mentioned it's
a serious disadvantage and and that situation abstention as
a yes under law. But not under our bylaws No
And I mean so we're saying great court trumps our bylaws and the Supreme Court and
that's what I wanted to make sure you spin you specifically said that it's
a defacto No it's in fact under the law it defacto Yes and that would require the
applicant to incur
a significant amount of expense to fight to file an appeal and then say that
a in fact this is
a denial Yes and it would it would just require you saying the tally of the vote is
read it two or two to two with one abstention which under Ohio law is
a yes that's all it requires I don't know that I would do that I would say it's to
tell you when you require two to two to one and it requires three votes to pass
well then I would. Then you should check with Mr Barbera because then you're not
following Ohio law but I have to. And our conversations together have led us to
suggest that should
a board member to spin deliberations the board members of the on and. On the Case
and shall not abstain so you. Can you can vote on that tonight I can but I will I
will conclude let me just ask you one question I will I will shut up and set up
under Ohio law if I abstain is that
a de facto yes or de facto No I'd have to check with Larry but I recommend we defer
any of this conversation until we get an affirmative yes or
a negative from Mr but that doesn't show you can or you guys are free to read the
case law and that doesn't change the another part of the issue which is that if
somebody comes here you know. People or members of the B.C.
Air elected to emplace in positions of responsibility for the purpose of expressing
an opinion action and not an action is
a duty that this room of the office absolutely expects that you all have an opinion
and that you vote yes or no in this case and I just placed my position I just gave
you
a very concrete example of where you know again I don't know why this is there are
so many issues Jeff and there's so much of an opportunity for raw postmarked there
is not a desire on my part to make this a cause celeb on the other hand make it
a cause celeb we will because I think it's ridiculous that you brought this issue
up it's not necessary it has not come up in the two years that about on the board
and it just further exacerbates
a situation that I don't think needs to be dealt with thank you for your opinion
you're welcome. Order of the changes that are
being suggested require action by the board we won through in so doing
a board to do for on the apps dating issue.
Just procedurally requires the bylaws required for changes to the bylaws the issue
to be presented to the and then at
a subsequent meeting it would be voted on so that gives an opportunity to have
continued discussions with with Mr Barbee air
a move that we make the we adopt the changes with the exception of the change about
abstentions I'm not sure that
a motion is in order just yet because it can't happen that this meeting has to
happen has more will happen in January meeting or than I would I would make
a formal request that Mr Barberry issue
a response to my question and your question is an abstention under Ohio law
a defacto yes or
a defacto no good thank you. And this will become
an agenda item in our journey where
a meeting corrects. Thank you all for that
discussion. Let's do adopt the resolutions for adoption. And
the first case. Two thousand and fourteen dish twenty five.
And it is WERE is Robert enjoy and the Angeles two over the first two thousand and
fourteen. Easy A two thousand and fourteen dish twenty five with Korean
contribution. Pursuant to Article three point three point two is there any
resolution seeking
a variance as applied to property located at seven two nine two two world would
lane or in township. Therefore be it resolved that by virtue of the foregoing good
coring touch abortive does here by Granted variance of Articles section ten point
two point one bracket C.
And ten point two point three brackets to his own resolution subject the following
conditions and those are one through three. And I guess we do
a roll call vote and that. It is one of the common Yeah I think I do want to thank
Becky. I just got these
a septum. I didn't see this the second was on the minutes and she did make the
change. That I asked for because I wanted to make it clear I want to go on the
record to make clear that. The motion was to prove this is an accessory structure
and that we were not taking the position that a carport is
a garage for future cases but with that statement I'm ready to vote.
Mr Kelly. Smart yes Mr Brace.
Straining or. Serve it yes.
That passes. And then. Is Easy A thousand and
fourteen dash twenty six. Where is and McBride on October tenth two thousand and
fourteen filed an appeal or B.C.
a Two thousand and fourteen to twenty six of the Korean touch of B.Z.
a Pursuant to Article three point three point two zero zero resolution seeking
a branch as applied to
a property located at nine forty five nine nine four five five in one four two
seven Corine Avenue in county therefore be resolved by virtue of the foregoing
Korean cash or borders or any appeals to us here by grant of variance of Article
Section eight point three point one has any resolution subject to Mission one two
three. Then will do
a roll call vote Mr KELLY I Mr Martin No Mr Price.
Mr running or I Mr better now.
Next is. Two thousand and fourteen dish twenty seven
where is your bow on October fourteenth two thousand and fourteen part of peel B.C.
Eight to fourteen just by seventh grade catch your borders or any appeals pursuant
to Article three point three point two zero zero resolution seeking
a variance as applied to property located at four zero one one West camp or road
Corps in township Hamilton County therefore great resolve that by virtue of the
foregoing according township board is only proposed as hereby granted variance of
Article I Section ten point two point one racket see it was
a new resolution subject to the following conditions as are one through four.
We would do
a roll call to police Mr Kelly and state. To Martin Yes. Mr
PRICE. Surrounding or. Mr victim yes.
In the final resolution final. Where is Brian
Arnold on October seventeenth appeal number B.Z.
Eight to fourteen dish twenty eight going to your borders only appeals to authority
three point three point two zero new resolution seeking
a variance is applied to property located nine four to seven corps and have no
Korean patch of Hamilton County where as
a board is considered all evidence properly presented and if I buy into to deny the
variance would result in necessary hardships to the owner of the premises in
question would not be in keeping with zoning of the spirit of zoning resolution
therefore be resolved by virtue of the foregoing to Korean touch boarding as only
appeals as here by Grant
a variance. Calls the last section fifteen point five point six between point by
point eight bracket during resolution object condition one two and three in the
rain or little old woman Miss with. Mr MARTIN Yes Mr
Price. Mr running or. Mr Burton Yes.
That will just. Have. Unfinished business I've got.
That's seeing. You Jeff but I do have what I'd like to yes to boards and put on
tonight I think has been extraordinary example of what I would like to propose
between our more more meetings there are is going to be. An opportunity for
discussion about zoning code or how it's applied war where we're going to have
issues that don't necessarily speak to
a specific case since that would violate site sign laws but would be an opportunity
for
a dialogue with the administration about it's going issue and we can then
only come to our public hearing move through the cases with that background and
have whatever unfinished but over partial questions we have answered but we're more
informed in the hearing can move more quickly. And would love for
a more open discussion about whatever's owning issue or conflict might be present.
Dissipating maybe one meeting every quarter ever general zoning issues or zoning
questions and that. But not case specific by no means case specific but
it's basically
a work session. Just like some input on that so we don't need do the work sessions
in the public sphere and basically that's going to. You're not violating I'd like
to learn more stuff. Can you elaborate again that and I don't want to restate what
I said earlier but I did respond to the suggestion over about a month
a colon it in your back to me because I do have and I I don't know if you've had
a chance to think about the things I sent you or not of the concerns that I say my
my concern is the Sunshine Law right whether this is going to be. Something that
somebody is going to suggest that we are or something we're going to have
a stenographer there are we going to is it going to be televised it's going to be
on the record. Those are issues that I that I did raise and that e-mail me and I
hear back from you. Like my thought of this is is
a working session. There are no motions made or rules
passed but it is OP who declare by things that may come up in
a meeting of the meetings can move and smooth way I don't think we need to make.
I don't I don't see
a need for that but I'm not suggesting we I'm just trying to get
a handle on what what you have in mind that's OK I mean the whole administrative
thing we're talking about tonight is I don't think underneath would not violate
such I love it makes us work more efficiently. I mean I can see it as
a great example of going back over some cases that we've had in the past that you
know hey why can't we bring this to the zoning board so that they can change the
law instead of us making a variance for it I think this would be
a good opportunity to discuss those types of things. So for example your issue of
what's carport. Mission. It's
a good idea but I'm well aware of the Clear Creek controversy and you know the
existence of a Clear Creek is
a clear creek that was sued rather extensively for having meetings and they may
have the name of the township on but it was but it's been in the news recently
where you know townships have been accused of having meetings. Where substantive
issues were discussed where the public was not invited to or excluded from and I
just don't want to set us up for that or again the concept as I said in my email to
the concept is a good idea but I think we need to make sure that we don't run
a foxhole of problems you know we've had at least one workshop that I. Know isn't
but we can't we I think when you and I discussed when we talked about it briefly
and the I mean we can't talk about any cases that are pending at all back that's
not being turned right on even though that would be necessarily closed to any
public who wants to come they were spending time you know listening to your credit
dialogue but. I don't see where it's necessarily close but it would make
a public meeting hopefully
a process of the room with less but I did question about. When it comes always
finds it I find amusing how many fast food restaurants do we need
a corridor of that may not be pertinent to the here but it certainly is an
opportunity to talk about how many restaurants that we meet or any of it. But.
It wouldn't be germane to. Whoever cards in next they don't care whether.
The way. These a solution might be just we have ties as
a meeting and we the agenda is just working session in this sort of matters and
anybody wants to come in and I don't work you know you have. Plenty of seating I
wouldn't even see that we mean we could do it or not to employ backroom but here
tonight it's just
a roundtable discussion about OK what. What's going to bubble up and then we get
a handle on people we get the beating as long as it was last is Barbieri doesn't
believe that were violating the sunshine laws and. I think it's
a good idea I just want to make sure that we follow the law and if that's all I've
said on the conversations not results are revolving around
a listing of future cases and not violating which I don't like the workings of how
. Bonior or as
a matter of fact we have an opportunity I don't believe we've been having cases
where we've used to January meeting as
a prototype pro-forma working session and that's what I mean. But I.
What we did tonight I think is
a work of what you know I would hate to do that but of people waiting to hear their
cases but. That I would hate to do it bro I mean big noise that work was set up
here and listen put but it's really not what stance but they want you can just go
to your. I assume is an alternate that I can even if you know we have
a full house if you come in it just ain't cut because it was going to venture up
your defend task opportunity for me. You know by the time that you're.
Really doing much better I think I'm really all kind to underline that I think what
the country I would I would think that you'd want to make sure that the alternates
are invited and take note of the options that don't show up because frankly there
are
a couple people that are alternates that I saw the first of the swearing in two years
ago and ever since and. It's
a good opportunity for an alternate to inforce their interest in being on there are
so many questions I have for you guys yeah but I just did I don't. Mean
in Help me understand that. You know we have the formal planning
seminars that are put on Anderson Council ever but this is more remain to.
Ride OK Well I think that would if we had no cases been January that would be
the first roll out of just
a discussion you know what is an issue with us we may I think also be welcome to
bring issues to happen as opposed to them bringing this is buskers up to may have
come up that we have an interest in. How will that play out. I would do I would
suggest separate January. And I think just
a suggestion sounds good. We're going to meet anyway and we can meet in the
meantime but this gives us as to work that out. Of my head any
business is and. We haven't been many minutes or correction.
And. I highlighted. This at places.
That there's any other. I just want my request to Barbier you issue an opinion to
make sure that Larry understands what I'm looking for is
a yes or no I don't want township to spend one hundred dollars on
a legal memorandum or three hundred dollars and all you need to do. Is read that
case I'm sure is read already and say yes or no that's what I'm looking for I'm not
looking for
a legal memorandum but I am hoping that this is I lived through that we can hear
before the meeting so that you know we're not coming to the meeting waiting to find
out when Mr very decided we're three weeks before that so if you could send us an
e-mail saying this is Larry's opinion on this yes or no and that's all I'm looking
for that would be great. For us for
a motion to prove the minutes. Of every time he's meeting that we're not email but
we're present at your place of the evening as amended is amended Thank you. For
that we do that. Motions We made his or second I second the motion made second
question very not all in favor I Okey dokey.
Mr B.-C.
Rules and procedures we just did that actually. Jumping on that sorry about that I
thought was new is out here number Yeah all right. German I do have an announcement
to make yes yesterday at the trustees meeting the trustees appointed two new
members to the to the B.B.C.
One being Mr Right in your been reappointed we're really excited about that.
Thank you for your certain other hundred years. And there's
a new alternate named Elisei Pilsen and she will be joining us should be sworn in
at the next meeting and joining us I think should be
a great addition her interview was phenomenal and I think she'll be great but it's
like. JOHN going to favor I thank you all very much you're
a Merry Christmas to. You.